CHECKPOINT1: For this project, I think I will research the epic poem, Beowulf. I plan to have the reading done by the end of next week (9/26/14) and will start online research soon after reading. I am still a little bit confused on which theme I should explore/ research. I will talk to Dr. T about that!
*I have decided to change my focus toLanval by Marie De France. I have read this story before but I honestly love it. I also didn't even notice it on this list until today (9/23/14). I'm still unsure on what theme I will focus on, but hopefully having a better understanding of this story (when compared to Beowulf), I can focus more on the assignment.
CHECKPOINT 2: Book Citation: Marie de France. Lanval. The Lais of Marie de France. Trans. Glynn S. Burgess and Keith
Summary: This lai, or story, is about a knight of King Arthur’s Round Table. This knight, Lanval, was not particularly a favorite of the King’s or anyone who knew him, really. One day, Lanval stops in a meadow with his horse. Two beautiful maidens approach him saying that their Lady has asked to see him. We are not told her name. After being brought to one another, they both confess their love and fall for each other. The maiden says she will come to Lanval whenever he calls her but their love is based on one condition; their love must be a secret. The maiden will also provide for Lanval anything he wishes, but like their love, he cannot reveal how he gets these riches because it will reveal their love. If he disobeys, he will lose his lover. Later, a gathering of knights and ladies occurs. Lanval, now being in love with the maiden, sits off to the side of the dance. The Queen is sitting in her bedroom window when she notices him sitting alone. She approaches him and asks Lanval to deceive the king and leave with her. Lanval replies as any knight would and says he can do no such thing. The Queen, quite angrily, calls him a homosexual. Lanval, now on the defense, reveals that he is already taken. He talks a bit too much and angers the queen even more by offending her.The Queen later convinces the King that Lanval has scorned her and they try to have him killed or banished through a trial. Lanval can be spared if he proves his statement to be true and reveal his lover. Lanval admits that he is not able to do this. However, at the end of the story, the maiden does show up, even though Lanval broke the rule of exposing their love. They happily ride off into the sunset on her horse to Avalon never to be seen again.
Close Readings: 1. “The maiden called the knight, who came forward and sat before the bed. ‘Lanval,’ she said, ‘fair friend, for you I came from my country. I have come far in search of you and if you are worthy and courtly, no emperor, count or king will have felt as much joy or happiness as you, for I love you above all else,’” (Marie de France 74).
This overtly beautiful maiden that no one has ever seen or heard of has appeared in this kingdom looking specifically for Lanval? It seems too good to be true for Lanval’s situation! He is the least important knight to King Arthur, yet the center of attention for this beautiful and powerful, not to mention single, woman. She comes from her country, which we are untold of. How could a woman from so far away know of a knight “whom no one put in a good word” (Marie de France 73)? In the last line, the maiden says, “I love you above all else” (Marie de France 74). What makes her so definitively choose Lanval as her lover? Lanval, for one, would probably rather not question her actions! I have read that some of Marie de France’s lais are versions of legends or folktales from her time. Could this maiden be some sort of mystical figure? After all, she does provide Lanval with a “boon” in which “he could wish for nothing which he would not have” (Marie de France 74). More importantly, “however generously he gave or spent, she would still find enough for him” (Marie de France 74-5). This ability to shower someone with endless gifts is, of course, non-realistic. Confusion arises when we find ourselves wondering if the maiden holds supernatural powers or not.
2. “‘Fair lady, if it were to please you to grant me the joy of wanting to love me, you could ask nothing that I would not do as best I could, be it foolish or wise. I shall do as you bid and abandon all others for you. I never want to leave you and this is what I most desire.’” (Marie de France 74).
It makes sense that this man, who is so close to being unwanted by almost everyone in his society, would succumb so easily and quickly to a woman who is admitting her love for him. Can we even call it love? Marie de France does. Therefore, could we view this as love at first sight? If so, it makes sense that they lay together right away because their love for one another is immediately immense. The fact that Lanval grasps so quickly at the maiden’s offer and admits to abandon his world to be in hers exposes women to be privileged leaders in this story and possibly in the time this lai was written. Lanval says, “if it were to please you… I shall do as you bid and abandon all others for you. I never want to leave you” (Marie de France 74). Lanval completely lays his heart out for this woman. By doing so, he allows her to have the upper hand in their relationship. She even issues him rules of their engagement shortly after! Legitimizing his lower rank, Lanval asks permission for the maiden to “grant me the joy of wanting to love me” (Marie de France 74). Lanval wishes for the maiden to allow him to have her. The maiden is privileged because she can withhold this valued sexual act. Women are the privileged leaders in this story and throughout history. Lysistrata is a great example where women hold this same upper hand over their husbands. In her story, while men were off in war, the women stayed home to “hold down the fortress”, which gave them a sense of entitlement. When the men came back from war, they most certainly expected to unwind from the violence of war by laying with their wives. Women gain even more of a sense of entitlement when they realize, like in the story Lysistrata, they can withhold this from their men. Has Marie de France realized this as well when writing this story and others?
3. “‘Thereupon the queen left and went in tears to her chamber, very distressed and angry that he had humiliated her in this way. She took to her bed ill and said that she would never again get up, unless the king saw that justice was done her in respect of her complaint. / The king had returned from the woods after an extremely happy day. He entered the queen’s apartments and when she saw him, she complained aloud, fell at his feet, cried for mercy and said that Lanval had shamedher" (Marie de France 77).
What were the queen’s motives for calling Lanval homosexual? Maybe it was her only way to make him feel bad. Did she not care how she would do it; did she just want to offend him? Was it truly because she was upset and humiliated? Also, what were her motives for twisting the story around to make Lanval at fault to the King? She does it to ensure her safety. The Queen ruins Lanval before he could have the chance to ruin her by revealing their true exchange to the King. If he had the chance, he probably would not even act on it. We know that while Gawain and other knights were visiting him, Lanval never reveals the truth. He does not try to tell the King probably not to make his punishment worse for himself. Lanval was not even on good terms with the King anyways. The Queen acted wrongfully and tries to get Lanval. It does not work, so now she wants everything to stay the same now that she knows she has no chance with Lanval. If the queen is caught, she can be caught in some serious legal issues with the King. It is known that in the past, as one scholar, M. J. Walkley, has pointed out in his article ‘The Critics and Lanval’, that Queen (Guinevere) has actually done betrayed King Arthur with his vassal, Lancelot. Lanval could be a derived from Lancelot’s name?
Annotated Bibliographies: 1.Kinoshita, Sharon. "Cherchez La Femme: Feminist Criticism and Marie de France's Lai de Lanval".
Romance Notes 34.3 (1994): 263-73. Print.
Kinoshita’s article is a critical analysis of several points of views on Marie de France’s lais. In her article, Kinoshita examines femininity in Marie de France’s Lai de Lanval. She assesses and criticizes the literary analyses of other scholars on Marie de France through refuting and agreeing with claims. Following, she compares and contrasts them with each other. Kinoshita also seeks and assesses “woman’s voice” in Lanval. She brings up another scholar’s article, agreeing with their argument and claiming that Marie de France’s voice seeps through the voice of her characters. Sharon Kinoshita is Professor of World Literature and Cultural Studies at University of California Santa Cruz. She is also the author of Medieval Boundaries: Rethinking Difference in Old French Literature (Pennsylvania, 2006) and numerous essays in medieval French Literatures. This article would be intended for Feminist studies, Women studies, and Marie de France studies because it utilizes feminist techniques and examines Marie de France’s voice in her writings, specifically her Lai de Lanval. Where Kinoshita focuses on Lanval as playing a passive role, rather than a heroic one, it is important to realize that, like Kelly Ramke argues in her article; female agency is present in the story.
2. Jurasinki, Stefan. "Treason and the Charge of Sodomy in the Lai de Lanval".
Romance Quarterly 54.4 (2007): 290-302. Print.
Jurasinki’s article is an in-depth explanation of the Queen’s accusation of homosexuality against Lanval in the Lai de Lanval. He comments on the Queen’s accusation to not have been induced by hurt feelings, but rather to have been an act to prevent potential legal jeopardy. In his article, Jurasinki searches for reasons why the Queen accuses Lanval of sodomy by searching the historic views on sodomy. Jurasinki develops much of his argument from the works of other scholars examining the legal situation and views on sodomy and the sexual environment in twelfth century France. He discusses the arguments of various scholars on sodomy and supports his reasoning by constituting them to Queen Guinevere’s actions. Jurasinki offers a valid point in claiming that the Queen’s accusation is not to hurt Lanval but to save herself in the future. Stefan Jurasinski, PhD, is an associate professor of English at The College at Brockport, State University of New York. This article would be intended for early Medieval studies, Marie de France studies, Historical Law studies, and Homosexuality and/or Homophobic studies because it examines laws and views on sodomy in early Medieval France.
3. Ramke, Kelly. "Re-Writing Agency: The Masculinization of Marie de France's Lai de Lanval in Two Middle English 'Translations'". Mediaevalia 26.2 (2005): 221-41. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 24 Sept. 2014.
Ramke’s critical analysis argues that female agency is promoted in the fairy mistress in Marie de France’s Lanval. In her article, Ramke examines direct speech and masculinization of the females, specifically the mistress, in the Lai de Lanval, as well as in the stories Sir Landevale and Sir Launfal. Ramke determines multiple instances where direct speech is used the three stories, showing how masculinization is attributed to certain characters. She also seeks specific instances, in the two Middle English texts where female objectivity is voiced to emphasize the idea of a male fantasy. Ramke finally examines, through compare and contrast, the mistress in Lanval and the two versions of Lanval in the Middle English texts as heroic. Similar to how Kinoshita felt in her article, Ramke views the fairy mistress as a masculinized, heroic figure. Kelly Ramke holds degrees in French from The University of the South and Tulane University. This article would be intended for Medieval Literature studies, Female studies, Male studies, and Sociology studies because it examines social relations and views of men and women in three medieval stories.
CHECKPOINT 3:**
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
(please ignore the "1's" next to my 4th, 5th, and 6th annotations. Not sure why they are there/ Can't remove them).
4. Magiru, Anca, and Ionel Magiru. "Legal Language and Criminal Conversation in
Medieval Society and Legends." Contemporary Readings in Law and SocialJustice 4.1 (2012): 618-26. Academic Search Complete. Web. 08 Oct. 2014.
Magiru and Magiru examine views on courtly love in the 12th century as well as in literary texts, specifically Arthurian texts, while emphasizing the need for secrecy coupled with courtly love. This does not pertain to any legal language, as titled in their article, so the claim is difficult to accept in this place in the article. They also examine the love, or lack thereof, within 12th century marriages. This aspect of the article may be helpful to emphasize why Queen Guinevere lusted after Lanval. Anca Magiru, PhD, is employed at Spiru Haret University School of Law and Public Administration in Constantza, Romania. She teaches English for law and public administration to students in Romania. She is married to Ionel Magiru who is employed at Ovidius University, also in Romania. This article would be intended for Middle Aged Literature Scholars because it examines literary texts from the 11th to 14th century. This article would also be intended for Courtly Love studies and Arthurian text studies because it looks at love in Arthurian texts, which reveals the history of relationships between people and how those relationships were viewed by the public.
5. Kong, Katherine. "Guilty as Charged? Subjectivity and the Law in La Chanson de
Roland and 'Lanval.'" Essays in Medieval Studies: Proceedings of the Illinois Medieval Association 17 (2000): 35-47. Print.
This article was found in Jurasinki’s reference page in his article, "Treason and the Charge of Sodomy in the Lai de Lanval". In her article, Kong plans to examine the law in the trial scene of the lai “Lanval” as well as another 12th century story, “La Chanson de Roland”, although she does not touch upon any actual 12th century laws, which would have been quite helpful. Kong does, however, argue the dominating force of ‘law’ in each story. She glances quickly at the history of individuality in the 12th century before delving into the two stories and their summaries. Leaning away from her main argument, Kong examines and argues the empowerment of women and direct speech used by the mistress at the end of the trial scene in Lanval, just as Ramke and Kinoshita do so in their articles. Kong also simply suggests that the trial scene in the lai mirrors what would happen in the real medieval legal system. Jurasinki also argues in his article that Lanval is based on the legal views on sodomy in the 12th century. Katherine Kong has taught French at the University of Tennessee and has studied Medieval France, Medieval Studies, and Gender Studies. This article would be intended for 12th century French literary studies and Medieval Legal studies because it examines the law in such stories. It could also be for 12th century Sociology studies because it examines individuality in the stories.
6. Ingram, Amy L. "Psychology of a King: Arthur in the Lancelot-Graal Cycle."
Ingram examines how King Arthur acts different, or not, in public and in private in Arthurian texts. Ingram also argues the complexity of the dual aspects of Arthur; the simplicity of Arthur in early French literature and how he also evolves. King Arthur is undeniably a simple character in Marie's lai Lanval. It's a wonder why there is such a lack of development of King Arthur in 12th century texts. Ingram also examines Arthur, in Merlin, as lustful for Guinevere, which is not a trait we have seen in Lanval. She also makes the claim that their passion ceases once they get married. Magiru and Magiru also allude to this in their article by claiming marriage was usually a business contract. Ingram also examines the romance between Lancelot and the Queen. She explains that Arthur keeps quiet about the affair because he does not want the public to find out. He feared dishonor and to be shamed. This makes me realize why he would have, just as quickly, thrown Lanval into a trial and possibly banishment, or worse. Ingram is a professor of French and is part of the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at James Madison University. This article could be for studies on King Arthur or studies on French or Arthurian texts because it looks at Arthur's character in early French literature.
Reflection:In my research for checkpoint two, I found a couple of articles talking about the empowerment and direct speech of women, namely the mistress and the Queen (Guinevere) which I agreed with, as well as the points on femininity. They argue that the women are more empowered in this text (and others) than the men are. Most articles I found talked about other stories along with Lanval, especially Marie de France’s lais. I also found an article on homosexuality in Lanval. It looked at how the laws on homosexuality (and the engagement in it) were viewed in the 12th century. I learned that homosexuality was a lot more prevalent than I had previously thought. For checkpoint three, I decided to focus more on history and laws taking place… basically the historical background to find out more about the lai Lanval. Magiru and Magiru brought up courtly love in Arthurian texts as well as in the 12th century. They also both look at the romance, or lack thereof, in 12th century marriages and how this played into the story and the scene between Guinevere and Lanval. The trial scene is also a major concern in two of my articles. Many use 12th century social and historic views to understand the scene. Almost all of the scholars’ articles I have read provide a summary of the piece of the text they want to talk about before they delve deeper into their claims. I found one article that absolutely did not help me further any of my thinking on the topic of the trial scene or gain any new insights, but it’s purpose was to support or refute claims made by other scholars on the trial scene in Lanval.
Query:The number one question that has presented itself to me as I continue to do my research on Lanval, is whether or not King Arthur knew about Queen Guinevere’s real life affair with Sir Lancelot? This lai must have been written by Marie de France after the truth of their relationship has been revealed. Why then, does the King not talk to Lanval after the accusation is made against him? Wouldn’t he have been aware of (that is if we consider this lai to be nonfiction) Guinevere’s lack of loyalty at this point in time? The fact that the king never approaches Lanval after the accusation is appalling. This king was so famous to have cared for his knights. He could have approached Lanval to see whether or not he was acting out of courtly love, which is the same reasoning in which he gives the benefit of the doubt for Sir Lancelot. Why does the king not love Lanval like his other knights? What kind of king is he? I also was wondering why Queen Guinevere would have her lack of loyalty to the King. She has such a high social position. Why would she want to jeopardize that security in this time where social power was highly taken into account, regardless if she did not feel any more love towards her husband?
CHECKPOINT 4:
Annotated Bibliography
7.
Rothwell, William. "The Trial Scene in Lanval and the Development of the Legal
Register in Anglo-Norman." Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 101.1 (2000):
17-36. Print.
This article was found in Jurasinki’s reference page in his article, "Treason and the Charge of Sodomy in the Lai de Lanval". Rothwell writes his article in response to many articles, particularly to “The Trial Scene in Lanval” by E. A. Francis. Rothwell claims to attempt to explore the legal language of the trial scene in Lanval in a lexicological point of view and to look at the vocabulary in the trial scene in Lanval but does not do so, which makes for an article the is difficult to follow. Rothwell brings up many articles of authors and refutes unknown claims made by them. I do not believe this is helpful because it does not use direct quotes or give names of the articles they are referring to. Rothwell also brings up the use of legal vocabulary in Lanval in various articles, but again, it is not useful because no quotes from the articles, nor the article titles, are provided; only in the reference page are they named. Rothwell then brings up the importance of rhymes in the lai, while also continuing to refute the claims of Francis’s article. Rothwell brings up other author’s claims as well as their own. This makes for a confusing thesis because Rothwell continues to jump around between topics throughout the article. Dr. William J. Rothwell is currently a professor at The Pennsylvania State University and President of Rothwell & Associates. This article would be intended for 12th century Philology studies because it attempts to deal with the legal history of language in Marie de France’s lai, although it does not actually quote Lanval. It would more useful to take a look at the actual article “The Trial Scene in Lanval” by E.A. Francis to hopefully gain a deeper look into the actual trial scene.
8. Hodges, Kenneth. "Guinevere's Politics in Malory's 'Morte Darthur.'" The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 104.1 (2005): 54-79. JSTOR. Web. 3 Nov. 2014.
Hodges argues that Queen Guinevere’s affair was completely political and not romantic. He plans to do this through looking at Le Morte Darthur, but also looks at many other texts where Guinevere shows up. However, he ultimately derives his argument from the former text. Hodges examines major affinities in Le Morte Darthur and how Queen Guinevere directly relates to them; but more importantly, how she is made dependent on the affinities of King Arthur and Lancelot. Hodges observes how a queen could use her affinities to be a good or bad queen. He says that Queen Guinevere’s affinity is not a positive one because she is not supporting the king. Hodges also mentions that Queen Guinevere’s affinity was distinct from King Arthur’s. If we as future outsiders can pick up on the distinction between these affinities, then we can argue that King Arthur was aware of the distinct affinities as well, which allows us to see why he may have chosen to believe Guinevere’s accusation story over Lanval’s potential defense story. Lanval is part of the Round Table, but I would argue that he is far from Arthur’s affinity.
Hodges also examines royal medieval marriages, specifically Guinevere and Arthur’s marriage. Because it was normal for kings and queens to have separate and independent accounts, Queen are empowered to “employ officers in her household” (60), which reveals that it might have been much easier to carry out an affair with these factors in play. With the affair becoming more public through Aggravayne and Mordred’s accusation against the queen, Queen Guinevere’s actions are, as Hodges discusses, are driven by a political purpose in which not to get caught and to maintain her affinities. Although, the views other knights held of Queen Guinevere, Hodges says, results in her loss of “respect as a queen” (66). Kenneth Hodges Ph.D. teaches English at Keene State College. This article would be intended for studies of Politics in Medieval Marriages and also on Queen Guinevere’s actions because it discusses the aspects of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere’s marriage.
Susann Samples examines Queen Guinevere’s various personalities and affairs, and the roles she plays in four Arthurian works: Geoffrey of Monmouth’s The History of the Kings of Britain (1136), Chretien de Troyes’s Charrette (c.1164), Hartmann von Aue’s Erec (1180-85), and Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival (1200-10). She also compares and contrasts the qualities of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere’s marriage between each story. Regarding Geoffrey’s text, Samples claims how their marriage was based on “political and economic considerations, not on mutual attraction” and that later, there is a “lack of interaction” (106). This gives us a really good insight on their relationship...or lack thereof. In Charrette, Samples claims Guinevere’s compliancy towards Arthur while still having an affair. Samples also brings up the fact that keeping that peace and her position as Queen allows Guinevere more freedom. This makes it easier for her to approach the men she desires. To slightly contrast, Samples looks at Erec and the King and Queen’s relationship is, in fact, loving, but Guinevere is still submissive and compliant. However, she does have maternal feelings for Erec, which she does act on. Samples argues that this is due to courtly rules. Similarly, in Parzival, Guinevere, again has an affair with a knight in which, she acts as a mother to. Susann Samples, Ph.D., is a Professor of the Foreign Languages and Literature Department at Mount Saint Mary’s College. This article would be for studies on Queen Guinevere because it examines her characteristics and affairs in multiple Arthurian texts. This article would also be for studies on twelfth century marriages in Arthurian texts because it directly examines King Arthur and Queen Guinevere’s marriage. The article could also be for courtly love studies in Arthurian texts because it examines Guinevere as a courtly female figure.
Argument AGAINST an Article: Rothwell writes his article in response to E.A. Francis’ chapter, “The Trial in Lanval”, which is written in Studies in French Language and Mediaeval Literature presented to Professor Mildred K. Pope. The article does not have a specific argument. Rothwell sets up an introduction that illuminates a plan that will explore and understand the legal language of the trial scene in Lanval while figuring in the social reality of Marie’s time; however, he does not do this. Furthermore, I would think if he plans to respond to Francis’ text, then he would not include so many other articles that he plans to refute. Rothwell brings up various other articles that he does not name and then refutes claims made by the article. To make his article even more difficult to read, Rothwell does not support his claims with quotations from the articles he is talking about. He also makes a claim about the importance of rhyming words in the story, which I believe has no reference towards understanding the legal language of the trial scene. This entire essay makes for a confusing thesis because Rothwell keeps jumping around between topics to talk about. Overall, it is extremely difficult to follow.
ABSTRACT
Why does Queen Guinevere go after Lanval? Did Arthur chase her away with a lack of love? More importantly, why does King Arthur choose to (and so quickly) take Queen Guinevere’s side regarding her accusation against Lanval, thus agreeing to banish his Knight, although the Queen has a well known history of affairs with other knights? Marie de France is a writer and poet that enjoys creating problems within the courtly system among nobility. In her lay, Lanval, Marie allows her fictional queen to go after the knight, Lanval, although she is obviously married to King Arthur. Although married to the king, Queen Guinevere is not happy or at all in love with him. Their marriage is important to examine because Arthur and Guinevere’s marriage is an arranged one and there is no mutual attraction (Samples 103). Because of this lack of love, Queen Guinevere’s motivation to love and be loved by another is not entirely her fault! What woman would be happy in a relationship where she did not love the other? We have seen this issue of an unhappy wife living with her husband in other lays written by Marie de France, most notably in Le Fresne. Desiring to be loved by someone when you do not feel so is bound to happen. In fact, part of the courtly system actually allows love to not be deterred by marriage (Tracy). However, this creates a major problem within this love triangle because no one should be allowed to have a relationship with the queen, other than the king. The issue of heirs, and illegitimate ones, is always lingering among everyone’s minds. This isn't ever really on Guinevere’s mind, as we can see with her multiple affairs, or with her approachment to Lanval. But what is interesting is that King Arthur never punishes her for any of it. Arthur, having no attraction to Guinevere, takes her side of the accusation, not because he is oblivious to her disloyalty, but because he wants to keep the peace as King and Queen.
Work Cited
Tracy, Dr. Kisha. "British Literature I: Anglo-Norman History and Language by Kisha Tracy on Prezi." Prezi.com. N.p., n.d. Web.
CHECKPOINT 1: For this project, I think I will research the epic poem, Beowulf. I plan to have the reading done by the end of next week (9/26/14) and will start online research soon after reading. I am still a little bit confused on which theme I should explore/ research. I will talk to Dr. T about that!
*I have decided to change my focus to Lanval by Marie De France. I have read this story before but I honestly love it. I also didn't even notice it on this list until today (9/23/14). I'm still unsure on what theme I will focus on, but hopefully having a better understanding of this story (when compared to Beowulf), I can focus more on the assignment.
CHECKPOINT 2:
Book Citation:
Marie de France. Lanval. The Lais of Marie de France. Trans. Glynn S. Burgess and Keith
Busby. 2nd ed. London: Penguin Books, 2003. Print.
Summary: This lai, or story, is about a knight of King Arthur’s Round Table. This knight, Lanval, was not particularly a favorite of the King’s or anyone who knew him, really. One day, Lanval stops in a meadow with his horse. Two beautiful maidens approach him saying that their Lady has asked to see him. We are not told her name. After being brought to one another, they both confess their love and fall for each other. The maiden says she will come to Lanval whenever he calls her but their love is based on one condition; their love must be a secret. The maiden will also provide for Lanval anything he wishes, but like their love, he cannot reveal how he gets these riches because it will reveal their love. If he disobeys, he will lose his lover. Later, a gathering of knights and ladies occurs. Lanval, now being in love with the maiden, sits off to the side of the dance. The Queen is sitting in her bedroom window when she notices him sitting alone. She approaches him and asks Lanval to deceive the king and leave with her. Lanval replies as any knight would and says he can do no such thing. The Queen, quite angrily, calls him a homosexual. Lanval, now on the defense, reveals that he is already taken. He talks a bit too much and angers the queen even more by offending her.The Queen later convinces the King that Lanval has scorned her and they try to have him killed or banished through a trial. Lanval can be spared if he proves his statement to be true and reveal his lover. Lanval admits that he is not able to do this. However, at the end of the story, the maiden does show up, even though Lanval broke the rule of exposing their love. They happily ride off into the sunset on her horse to Avalon never to be seen again.
Close Readings:
1. “The maiden called the knight, who came forward and sat before the bed. ‘Lanval,’ she said, ‘fair friend, for you I came from my country. I have come far in search of you and if you are worthy and courtly, no emperor, count or king will have felt as much joy or happiness as you, for I love you above all else,’” (Marie de France 74).
This overtly beautiful maiden that no one has ever seen or heard of has appeared in this kingdom looking specifically for Lanval? It seems too good to be true for Lanval’s situation! He is the least important knight to King Arthur, yet the center of attention for this beautiful and powerful, not to mention single, woman. She comes from her country, which we are untold of. How could a woman from so far away know of a knight “whom no one put in a good word” (Marie de France 73)? In the last line, the maiden says, “I love you above all else” (Marie de France 74). What makes her so definitively choose Lanval as her lover? Lanval, for one, would probably rather not question her actions!
I have read that some of Marie de France’s lais are versions of legends or folktales from her time. Could this maiden be some sort of mystical figure? After all, she does provide Lanval with a “boon” in which “he could wish for nothing which he would not have” (Marie de France 74). More importantly, “however generously he gave or spent, she would still find enough for him” (Marie de France 74-5). This ability to shower someone with endless gifts is, of course, non-realistic. Confusion arises when we find ourselves wondering if the maiden holds supernatural powers or not.
2. “‘Fair lady, if it were to please you to grant me the joy of wanting to love me, you could ask nothing that I would not do as best I could, be it foolish or wise. I shall do as you bid and abandon all others for you. I never want to leave you and this is what I most desire.’” (Marie de France 74).
It makes sense that this man, who is so close to being unwanted by almost everyone in his society, would succumb so easily and quickly to a woman who is admitting her love for him. Can we even call it love? Marie de France does. Therefore, could we view this as love at first sight? If so, it makes sense that they lay together right away because their love for one another is immediately immense.
The fact that Lanval grasps so quickly at the maiden’s offer and admits to abandon his world to be in hers exposes women to be privileged leaders in this story and possibly in the time this lai was written. Lanval says, “if it were to please you… I shall do as you bid and abandon all others for you. I never want to leave you” (Marie de France 74). Lanval completely lays his heart out for this woman. By doing so, he allows her to have the upper hand in their relationship. She even issues him rules of their engagement shortly after!
Legitimizing his lower rank, Lanval asks permission for the maiden to “grant me the joy of wanting to love me” (Marie de France 74). Lanval wishes for the maiden to allow him to have her. The maiden is privileged because she can withhold this valued sexual act. Women are the privileged leaders in this story and throughout history. Lysistrata is a great example where women hold this same upper hand over their husbands. In her story, while men were off in war, the women stayed home to “hold down the fortress”, which gave them a sense of entitlement. When the men came back from war, they most certainly expected to unwind from the violence of war by laying with their wives. Women gain even more of a sense of entitlement when they realize, like in the story Lysistrata, they can withhold this from their men. Has Marie de France realized this as well when writing this story and others?
3. “‘Thereupon the queen left and went in tears to her chamber, very distressed and angry that he had humiliated her in this way. She took to her bed ill and said that she would never again get up, unless the king saw that justice was done her in respect of her complaint. / The king had returned from the woods after an extremely happy day. He entered the queen’s apartments and when she saw him, she complained aloud, fell at his feet, cried for mercy and said that Lanval had shamed her" (Marie de France 77).
What were the queen’s motives for calling Lanval homosexual? Maybe it was her only way to make him feel bad. Did she not care how she would do it; did she just want to offend him? Was it truly because she was upset and humiliated?
Also, what were her motives for twisting the story around to make Lanval at fault to the King? She does it to ensure her safety. The Queen ruins Lanval before he could have the chance to ruin her by revealing their true exchange to the King. If he had the chance, he probably would not even act on it. We know that while Gawain and other knights were visiting him, Lanval never reveals the truth. He does not try to tell the King probably not to make his punishment worse for himself. Lanval was not even on good terms with the King anyways. The Queen acted wrongfully and tries to get Lanval. It does not work, so now she wants everything to stay the same now that she knows she has no chance with Lanval. If the queen is caught, she can be caught in some serious legal issues with the King. It is known that in the past, as one scholar, M. J. Walkley, has pointed out in his article ‘The Critics and Lanval’, that Queen (Guinevere) has actually done betrayed King Arthur with his vassal, Lancelot. Lanval could be a derived from Lancelot’s name?
Annotated Bibliographies:
1. Kinoshita, Sharon. "Cherchez La Femme: Feminist Criticism and Marie de France's Lai de Lanval".
Romance Notes 34.3 (1994): 263-73. Print.
Kinoshita’s article is a critical analysis of several points of views on Marie de France’s lais. In her article, Kinoshita examines femininity in Marie de France’s Lai de Lanval. She assesses and criticizes the literary analyses of other scholars on Marie de France through refuting and agreeing with claims. Following, she compares and contrasts them with each other. Kinoshita also seeks and assesses “woman’s voice” in Lanval. She brings up another scholar’s article, agreeing with their argument and claiming that Marie de France’s voice seeps through the voice of her characters. Sharon Kinoshita is Professor of World Literature and Cultural Studies at University of California Santa Cruz. She is also the author of Medieval Boundaries: Rethinking Difference in Old French Literature (Pennsylvania, 2006) and numerous essays in medieval French Literatures. This article would be intended for Feminist studies, Women studies, and Marie de France studies because it utilizes feminist techniques and examines Marie de France’s voice in her writings, specifically her Lai de Lanval. Where Kinoshita focuses on Lanval as playing a passive role, rather than a heroic one, it is important to realize that, like Kelly Ramke argues in her article; female agency is present in the story.
2. Jurasinki, Stefan. "Treason and the Charge of Sodomy in the Lai de Lanval".
Romance Quarterly 54.4 (2007): 290-302. Print.
Jurasinki’s article is an in-depth explanation of the Queen’s accusation of homosexuality against Lanval in the Lai de Lanval. He comments on the Queen’s accusation to not have been induced by hurt feelings, but rather to have been an act to prevent potential legal jeopardy. In his article, Jurasinki searches for reasons why the Queen accuses Lanval of sodomy by searching the historic views on sodomy. Jurasinki develops much of his argument from the works of other scholars examining the legal situation and views on sodomy and the sexual environment in twelfth century France. He discusses the arguments of various scholars on sodomy and supports his reasoning by constituting them to Queen Guinevere’s actions. Jurasinki offers a valid point in claiming that the Queen’s accusation is not to hurt Lanval but to save herself in the future. Stefan Jurasinski, PhD, is an associate professor of English at The College at Brockport, State University of New York. This article would be intended for early Medieval studies, Marie de France studies, Historical Law studies, and Homosexuality and/or Homophobic studies because it examines laws and views on sodomy in early Medieval France.
3. Ramke, Kelly. "Re-Writing Agency: The Masculinization of Marie de France's Lai de Lanval in Two Middle English 'Translations'". Mediaevalia 26.2 (2005): 221-41. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 24 Sept. 2014.
Ramke’s critical analysis argues that female agency is promoted in the fairy mistress in Marie de France’s Lanval. In her article, Ramke examines direct speech and masculinization of the females, specifically the mistress, in the Lai de Lanval, as well as in the stories Sir Landevale and Sir Launfal. Ramke determines multiple instances where direct speech is used the three stories, showing how masculinization is attributed to certain characters. She also seeks specific instances, in the two Middle English texts where female objectivity is voiced to emphasize the idea of a male fantasy. Ramke finally examines, through compare and contrast, the mistress in Lanval and the two versions of Lanval in the Middle English texts as heroic. Similar to how Kinoshita felt in her article, Ramke views the fairy mistress as a masculinized, heroic figure. Kelly Ramke holds degrees in French from The University of the South and Tulane University. This article would be intended for Medieval Literature studies, Female studies, Male studies, and Sociology studies because it examines social relations and views of men and women in three medieval stories.
CHECKPOINT 3:**
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
(please ignore the "1's" next to my 4th, 5th, and 6th annotations. Not sure why they are there/ Can't remove them).
Medieval Society and Legends." Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice 4.1 (2012): 618-26. Academic Search Complete. Web. 08 Oct. 2014.
Magiru and Magiru examine views on courtly love in the 12th century as well as in literary texts, specifically Arthurian texts, while emphasizing the need for secrecy coupled with courtly love. This does not pertain to any legal language, as titled in their article, so the claim is difficult to accept in this place in the article. They also examine the love, or lack thereof, within 12th century marriages. This aspect of the article may be helpful to emphasize why Queen Guinevere lusted after Lanval. Anca Magiru, PhD, is employed at Spiru Haret University School of Law and Public Administration in Constantza, Romania. She teaches English for law and public administration to students in Romania. She is married to Ionel Magiru who is employed at Ovidius University, also in Romania. This article would be intended for Middle Aged Literature Scholars because it examines literary texts from the 11th to 14th century. This article would also be intended for Courtly Love studies and Arthurian text studies because it looks at love in Arthurian texts, which reveals the history of relationships between people and how those relationships were viewed by the public.Roland and 'Lanval.'" Essays in Medieval Studies: Proceedings of the Illinois Medieval Association 17 (2000): 35-47. Print.
This article was found in Jurasinki’s reference page in his article, "Treason and the Charge of Sodomy in the Lai de Lanval". In her article, Kong plans to examine the law in the trial scene of the lai “Lanval” as well as another 12th century story, “La Chanson de Roland”, although she does not touch upon any actual 12th century laws, which would have been quite helpful. Kong does, however, argue the dominating force of ‘law’ in each story. She glances quickly at the history of individuality in the 12th century before delving into the two stories and their summaries. Leaning away from her main argument, Kong examines and argues the empowerment of women and direct speech used by the mistress at the end of the trial scene in Lanval, just as Ramke and Kinoshita do so in their articles. Kong also simply suggests that the trial scene in the lai mirrors what would happen in the real medieval legal system. Jurasinki also argues in his article that Lanval is based on the legal views on sodomy in the 12th century. Katherine Kong has taught French at the University of Tennessee and has studied Medieval France, Medieval Studies, and Gender Studies. This article would be intended for 12th century French literary studies and Medieval Legal studies because it examines the law in such stories. It could also be for 12th century Sociology studies because it examines individuality in the stories.6. Ingram, Amy L. "Psychology of a King: Arthur in the Lancelot-Graal Cycle."
Philological Quarterly (PQ) 82.4 (Fall 2003): 349-65. Print.Ingram examines how King Arthur acts different, or not, in public and in private in Arthurian texts. Ingram also argues the complexity of the dual aspects of Arthur; the simplicity of Arthur in early French literature and how he also evolves. King Arthur is undeniably a simple character in Marie's lai Lanval. It's a wonder why there is such a lack of development of King Arthur in 12th century texts. Ingram also examines Arthur, in Merlin, as lustful for Guinevere, which is not a trait we have seen in Lanval. She also makes the claim that their passion ceases once they get married. Magiru and Magiru also allude to this in their article by claiming marriage was usually a business contract. Ingram also examines the romance between Lancelot and the Queen. She explains that Arthur keeps quiet about the affair because he does not want the public to find out. He feared dishonor and to be shamed. This makes me realize why he would have, just as quickly, thrown Lanval into a trial and possibly banishment, or worse. Ingram is a professor of French and is part of the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at James Madison University. This article could be for studies on King Arthur or studies on French or Arthurian texts because it looks at Arthur's character in early French literature.
Reflection: In my research for checkpoint two, I found a couple of articles talking about the empowerment and direct speech of women, namely the mistress and the Queen (Guinevere) which I agreed with, as well as the points on femininity. They argue that the women are more empowered in this text (and others) than the men are. Most articles I found talked about other stories along with Lanval, especially Marie de France’s lais. I also found an article on homosexuality in Lanval. It looked at how the laws on homosexuality (and the engagement in it) were viewed in the 12th century. I learned that homosexuality was a lot more prevalent than I had previously thought. For checkpoint three, I decided to focus more on history and laws taking place… basically the historical background to find out more about the lai Lanval. Magiru and Magiru brought up courtly love in Arthurian texts as well as in the 12th century. They also both look at the romance, or lack thereof, in 12th century marriages and how this played into the story and the scene between Guinevere and Lanval. The trial scene is also a major concern in two of my articles. Many use 12th century social and historic views to understand the scene. Almost all of the scholars’ articles I have read provide a summary of the piece of the text they want to talk about before they delve deeper into their claims. I found one article that absolutely did not help me further any of my thinking on the topic of the trial scene or gain any new insights, but it’s purpose was to support or refute claims made by other scholars on the trial scene in Lanval.
Query: The number one question that has presented itself to me as I continue to do my research on Lanval, is whether or not King Arthur knew about Queen Guinevere’s real life affair with Sir Lancelot? This lai must have been written by Marie de France after the truth of their relationship has been revealed. Why then, does the King not talk to Lanval after the accusation is made against him? Wouldn’t he have been aware of (that is if we consider this lai to be nonfiction) Guinevere’s lack of loyalty at this point in time? The fact that the king never approaches Lanval after the accusation is appalling. This king was so famous to have cared for his knights. He could have approached Lanval to see whether or not he was acting out of courtly love, which is the same reasoning in which he gives the benefit of the doubt for Sir Lancelot. Why does the king not love Lanval like his other knights? What kind of king is he?
I also was wondering why Queen Guinevere would have her lack of loyalty to the King. She has such a high social position. Why would she want to jeopardize that security in this time where social power was highly taken into account, regardless if she did not feel any more love towards her husband?
CHECKPOINT 4:
Annotated Bibliography
7.
Register in Anglo-Norman." Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 101.1 (2000):
17-36. Print.
This article was found in Jurasinki’s reference page in his article, "Treason and the Charge of Sodomy in the Lai de Lanval". Rothwell writes his article in response to many articles, particularly to “The Trial Scene in Lanval” by E. A. Francis. Rothwell claims to attempt to explore the legal language of the trial scene in Lanval in a lexicological point of view and to look at the vocabulary in the trial scene in Lanval but does not do so, which makes for an article the is difficult to follow. Rothwell brings up many articles of authors and refutes unknown claims made by them. I do not believe this is helpful because it does not use direct quotes or give names of the articles they are referring to. Rothwell also brings up the use of legal vocabulary in Lanval in various articles, but again, it is not useful because no quotes from the articles, nor the article titles, are provided; only in the reference page are they named. Rothwell then brings up the importance of rhymes in the lai, while also continuing to refute the claims of Francis’s article. Rothwell brings up other author’s claims as well as their own. This makes for a confusing thesis because Rothwell continues to jump around between topics throughout the article. Dr. William J. Rothwell is currently a professor at The Pennsylvania State University and President of Rothwell & Associates. This article would be intended for 12th century Philology studies because it attempts to deal with the legal history of language in Marie de France’s lai, although it does not actually quote Lanval. It would more useful to take a look at the actual article “The Trial Scene in Lanval” by E.A. Francis to hopefully gain a deeper look into the actual trial scene.
8. Hodges, Kenneth. "Guinevere's Politics in Malory's 'Morte Darthur.'" The Journal
of English and Germanic Philology 104.1 (2005): 54-79. JSTOR. Web. 3 Nov. 2014.
Hodges argues that Queen Guinevere’s affair was completely political and not romantic. He plans to do this through looking at Le Morte Darthur, but also looks at many other texts where Guinevere shows up. However, he ultimately derives his argument from the former text. Hodges examines major affinities in Le Morte Darthur and how Queen Guinevere directly relates to them; but more importantly, how she is made dependent on the affinities of King Arthur and Lancelot. Hodges observes how a queen could use her affinities to be a good or bad queen. He says that Queen Guinevere’s affinity is not a positive one because she is not supporting the king. Hodges also mentions that Queen Guinevere’s affinity was distinct from King Arthur’s. If we as future outsiders can pick up on the distinction between these affinities, then we can argue that King Arthur was aware of the distinct affinities as well, which allows us to see why he may have chosen to believe Guinevere’s accusation story over Lanval’s potential defense story. Lanval is part of the Round Table, but I would argue that he is far from Arthur’s affinity.
Hodges also examines royal medieval marriages, specifically Guinevere and Arthur’s marriage. Because it was normal for kings and queens to have separate and independent accounts, Queen are empowered to “employ officers in her household” (60), which reveals that it might have been much easier to carry out an affair with these factors in play. With the affair becoming more public through Aggravayne and Mordred’s accusation against the queen, Queen Guinevere’s actions are, as Hodges discusses, are driven by a political purpose in which not to get caught and to maintain her affinities. Although, the views other knights held of Queen Guinevere, Hodges says, results in her loss of “respect as a queen” (66). Kenneth Hodges Ph.D. teaches English at Keene State College. This article would be intended for studies of Politics in Medieval Marriages and also on Queen Guinevere’s actions because it discusses the aspects of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere’s marriage.
9. Samples, Susann. "Guinevere: A Re-Appraisal." Arthurian Interpretations 3.2
(Spring 1989): 106-18. JSTOR. Web. 20 Nov. 2014.
Susann Samples examines Queen Guinevere’s various personalities and affairs, and the roles she plays in four Arthurian works: Geoffrey of Monmouth’s The History of the Kings of Britain (1136), Chretien de Troyes’s Charrette (c.1164), Hartmann von Aue’s Erec (1180-85), and Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival (1200-10). She also compares and contrasts the qualities of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere’s marriage between each story. Regarding Geoffrey’s text, Samples claims how their marriage was based on “political and economic considerations, not on mutual attraction” and that later, there is a “lack of interaction” (106). This gives us a really good insight on their relationship...or lack thereof. In Charrette, Samples claims Guinevere’s compliancy towards Arthur while still having an affair. Samples also brings up the fact that keeping that peace and her position as Queen allows Guinevere more freedom. This makes it easier for her to approach the men she desires. To slightly contrast, Samples looks at Erec and the King and Queen’s relationship is, in fact, loving, but Guinevere is still submissive and compliant. However, she does have maternal feelings for Erec, which she does act on. Samples argues that this is due to courtly rules. Similarly, in Parzival, Guinevere, again has an affair with a knight in which, she acts as a mother to. Susann Samples, Ph.D., is a Professor of the Foreign Languages and Literature Department at Mount Saint Mary’s College. This article would be for studies on Queen Guinevere because it examines her characteristics and affairs in multiple Arthurian texts. This article would also be for studies on twelfth century marriages in Arthurian texts because it directly examines King Arthur and Queen Guinevere’s marriage. The article could also be for courtly love studies in Arthurian texts because it examines Guinevere as a courtly female figure.
Argument AGAINST an Article:
Rothwell writes his article in response to E.A. Francis’ chapter, “The Trial in Lanval”, which is written in Studies in French Language and Mediaeval Literature presented to Professor Mildred K. Pope. The article does not have a specific argument. Rothwell sets up an introduction that illuminates a plan that will explore and understand the legal language of the trial scene in Lanval while figuring in the social reality of Marie’s time; however, he does not do this. Furthermore, I would think if he plans to respond to Francis’ text, then he would not include so many other articles that he plans to refute. Rothwell brings up various other articles that he does not name and then refutes claims made by the article. To make his article even more difficult to read, Rothwell does not support his claims with quotations from the articles he is talking about. He also makes a claim about the importance of rhyming words in the story, which I believe has no reference towards understanding the legal language of the trial scene. This entire essay makes for a confusing thesis because Rothwell keeps jumping around between topics to talk about. Overall, it is extremely difficult to follow.
ABSTRACT
Why does Queen Guinevere go after Lanval? Did Arthur chase her away with a lack of love? More importantly, why does King Arthur choose to (and so quickly) take Queen Guinevere’s side regarding her accusation against Lanval, thus agreeing to banish his Knight, although the Queen has a well known history of affairs with other knights?
Marie de France is a writer and poet that enjoys creating problems within the courtly system among nobility. In her lay, Lanval, Marie allows her fictional queen to go after the knight, Lanval, although she is obviously married to King Arthur. Although married to the king, Queen Guinevere is not happy or at all in love with him. Their marriage is important to examine because Arthur and Guinevere’s marriage is an arranged one and there is no mutual attraction (Samples 103). Because of this lack of love, Queen Guinevere’s motivation to love and be loved by another is not entirely her fault! What woman would be happy in a relationship where she did not love the other? We have seen this issue of an unhappy wife living with her husband in other lays written by Marie de France, most notably in Le Fresne. Desiring to be loved by someone when you do not feel so is bound to happen. In fact, part of the courtly system actually allows love to not be deterred by marriage (Tracy). However, this creates a major problem within this love triangle because no one should be allowed to have a relationship with the queen, other than the king. The issue of heirs, and illegitimate ones, is always lingering among everyone’s minds. This isn't ever really on Guinevere’s mind, as we can see with her multiple affairs, or with her approachment to Lanval. But what is interesting is that King Arthur never punishes her for any of it. Arthur, having no attraction to Guinevere, takes her side of the accusation, not because he is oblivious to her disloyalty, but because he wants to keep the peace as King and Queen.
Work Cited
Tracy, Dr. Kisha. "British Literature I: Anglo-Norman History and Language by Kisha Tracy on Prezi." Prezi.com. N.p., n.d. Web.